Acute and delayed nausea and emesis control in pediatric oncology patients

Age of Pediatric Patients Affects Delayed Chemotherapy-Induced Vomiting

The purpose of this study was to investigate the risk factors for delayed chemotherapy-induced vomiting (DCIV) in pediatric oncology patients. We collected data on pediatric patients from a tertiary care pediatric hospital in an Asian urban center. We analyzed the risk factors for DCIV in patients by univariate analysis and logistic regression. Patients were grouped according to age by the Youden index, and differences in clinical features between the high-risk and low-risk groups were calculated. In the univariate analysis, the number of chemotherapy days, pH, and blood glucose levels were significantly associated with DCIV. In the logistic regression analysis, patient age was an independent risk factor (odds ratio [OR] = 1.013, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.005-1.021, P = .002). Children in the high-risk group had a higher grade of vomiting (P < .05). Age is an important risk factor for DCIV in pediatric patients, with older children tending to experience more frequent and more severe vomiting.

Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia

Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) is a haematological malignancy characterized by the uncontrolled proliferation of immature lymphoid cells. Over past decades, significant progress has been made in understanding the biology of ALL, resulting in remarkable improvements in its diagnosis, treatment and monitoring. Since the advent of chemotherapy, ALL has been the platform to test for innovative approaches applicable to cancer in general. For example, the advent of omics medicine has led to a deeper understanding of the molecular and genetic features that underpin ALL. Innovations in genomic profiling techniques have identified specific genetic alterations and mutations that drive ALL, inspiring new therapies. Targeted agents, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immunotherapies, have shown promising results in subgroups of patients while minimizing adverse effects. Furthermore, the development of chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy represents a breakthrough in ALL treatment, resulting in remarkable responses and potential long-term remissions. Advances are not limited to treatment modalities alone. Measurable residual disease monitoring and ex vivo drug response profiling screening have provided earlier detection of disease relapse and identification of exceptional responders, enabling clinicians to adjust treatment strategies for individual patients. Decades of supportive and prophylactic care have improved the management of treatment-related complications, enhancing the quality of life for patients with ALL.

Outcome of antiemetic prophylaxis among pediatric cancer patients receiving moderate to highly emetogenic chemotherapy at pediatric hemato-oncology ward of Tikur Anbessa specialized hospital: A prospective observational study

INTRODUCTION

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a major issue for chemotherapy pediatric patients, especially in developing countries due to limited access to essential antiemetics. This study aimed to assess antiemetic prophylaxis outcomes in pediatric cancer patients at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

METHODS

A longitudinal prospective observational study design was conducted among 201 pediatric cancer patients followed up to 120 h post-chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The majority of patients (75.1%) received combination prophylactic antiemetics in the acute phase. Complete response (CR) was the highest in the acute phase (71.1%). Emesis episodes occurred most frequently on the first day of treatment (28.4%) and gradually decreased over time. History of motion sickness, platinum-based chemotherapy, and prior chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV) were associated with emesis during the acute phase whereas multiple-day chemotherapy, prior CIV, receipt of antiemetics, and a history of motion sickness in the delayed phase. However, the odds of CIV were reduced with steroid presence in the chemotherapy regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable number of participants could not achieve a CR. It is important for clinicians to be cognizant of risk factors that influence the outcome of antiemetic prophylaxis to achieve better control of CINV among pediatric cancer patients.

Translation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Hindi Language Version of the Pediatric Nausea Assessment Tool (PeNAT) in the Indian Population

OBJECTIVES

To translate the Pediatric Nausea Assessment Tool (PeNAT) into Hindi and validate it in Indian pediatric cancer patients and survivors.

METHODS

The PeNAT-Hindi was finalized by forward and backward translations, and pilot testing. The PeNAT-Hindi was administered to 200 Hindi-speaking pediatric (4-18 y) cancer patients/survivors, in three groups. These included pediatric cancer patients who had recently received chemotherapy (n = 150); who received no chemotherapy within 5 d (n = 25) and survivors (n = 25). Construct validity was tested by comparing scores among the three groups. Test-retest reliability and criterion validity were estimated by the correlation of the first PeNAT score with the second (taken 1 h later) PeNAT score and the number of vomiting/retching episodes, respectively. Convergent validity and discriminant validity were estimated by correlating PeNAT scores with parent-assessed nausea severity, and pain, respectively. The responsiveness was tested by comparing second PeNAT scores with subsequent divergent PeNAT scores among patients reporting subjective change (improvement and worsening, respectively) in nausea severity.

RESULTS

Test-retest reliability of PeNAT-Hindi was good (intraclass correlation = 0.791). The initial PeNAT score had moderate correlation with the number of vomiting/retching episodes (Spearman ρ = 0.401). Median PeNAT scores in group 1 versus groups 2 and 3 were significantly different (p < 0.001). Initial PeNAT scores showed a moderate correlation with parent-assessed nausea (Spearman ρ = 0.657) and a weak correlation with parent-assessed pain (Spearman ρ = 0.319). The responsiveness (standardized response mean) of PeNAT-Hindi to the change in nausea severity was -1.79 (improvement) and 2.19 (worsening), respectively.

CONCLUSION

PeNAT-Hindi showed good reliability and acceptable validity. It may be used among Hindi-speaking children for measuring nausea. The responsiveness of PeNAT-Hindi needs further evaluation.

Olanzapine cost-effectiveness in vomiting and nausea from highly emetogenic chemotherapy in children and adolescents

OBJECTIVES

To assess the cost-effectiveness of addition of olanzapine to a prophylactic antiemetic regimen containing aprepitant, dexamethasone and ondansetron among children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) in India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA.

METHODS

Health states were estimated using individual patient-level outcome data from a randomised trial. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefit (NMB) were calculated from the patient perspective for India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA. One-way sensitivity analysis was done by varying the cost of olanzapine, cost of hospitalisation and utility values by ±25%.

RESULTS

The olanzapine arm had an increment of 0.0018 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) over the control arm. The mean total expenditure in the olanzapine arm was greater by US$0.51, US$0.43, US$6.73, US$11.05 and US$12.35 in India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA, respectively. The ICUR($/QALY) was US$282.60 in India, US$241.42 in Bangladesh, US$3755.93 in Indonesia, US$6161.83 in the UK and US$6887.41 in the USA. The NMB was US$9.86, US$10.12, US$14.08, US$44.74 and US$98.79 for India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA, respectively. The ICUR estimates of the base case and sensitivity analysis were below the willingness-to-pay threshold in all scenarios.

CONCLUSION

The addition of olanzapine as a fourth agent for antiemetic prophylaxis is cost-effective despite an increase in overall expenditure. Olanzapine should be uniformly considered for children receiving HEC.

Vomiting after intrathecal chemotherapy under anesthesia in pediatric patients with hematologic cancers: A cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Despite preventive strategies, vomiting is an adverse event affecting patients with cancer. However, literature on the incidence and risk factors for vomiting in pediatric patients with cancer are scarce.

AIM

To assess the incidence and risk factors for vomiting within 24 h and goodness of fit for the Eberhart score in pediatric patients with hematologic cancers after receiving intrathecal chemotherapy under deep sedation.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included patients under 20 years of age with hematologic cancers who were scheduled to undergo intrathecal chemotherapy under anesthesia. The primary outcome was the occurrence of vomiting within 24 h after the end of anesthesia. Sociodemographic and procedure data and underlying diseases were collected. Patients were monitored during the procedure, in the postanesthesia care unit, and the day after (by phone call).

RESULTS

A total of 139 patients were included, and the incidence of vomiting was 30.9% within 24 h after intrathecal chemotherapy under anesthesia, with 90.7% of vomiting prior to 6 h. Prophylactic ondansetron was administered prior to the procedure to 45.3% of patients. Risk factors for vomiting were female gender (hazard ratio: 2.47, 95% confidence interval: 1.35-4.53, p: .003), consolidation phase of treatment (hazard ratio: 2.16, 95% confidence interval: 1.10-4.24, p: .025), and history of kinetosis (hazard ratio: 2.49, 95% confidence interval: 1.31-4.70, p: .005). Incidence of vomit was higher than estimated by the Eberhart score distribution (observed incidence in patients with a score of zero: 33.3%; with a score of one: 28.8%; with a score of two: 60%).

CONCLUSION

A high incidence of vomiting was observed within 24 h after intrathecal chemotherapy under propofol deep sedation. Risk factors for this outcome were established (being female, consolidation phase of treatment, and previous kinetosis), and evidence suggested that the Eberhart score was not suitable for the studied population.

Palonosetron for prevention of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric patients: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are common adverse events in patients undergoing emetogenic chemotherapy. Palonosetron, a second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3 RA), has demonstrated non-inferiority to first-generation 5-HT3 RAs for CINV in pediatric patients. Although palonosetron has a long half-life and prolonged antiemetic action, its efficacy against delayed CINV in pediatric patients is not well understood. Therefore, this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to evaluate the efficacy of palonosetron for delayed CINV in pediatric patients.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases was performed. A meta-analysis was performed using forest plots, and risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. A funnel plot was constructed to explore publication bias.

RESULTS

The literature search retrieved 842 records, of which 23 full-text articles were assessed, including six RCTs. Meta-analysis of four RCTs that reported on the complete response (CR: defined as no emesis and no rescue medication) rate for delayed CINV revealed that palonosetron was statistically superior to first-generation 5-HT3 RAs (RR = 1.21 [95% CI 1.09-1.35]; p < 0.01). Although the number of studies included was small, no publication bias was observed in the funnel plots. In addition, the CR rate for overall and acute CINV was also significantly higher for palonosetron (RR = 1.25 [95% CI 1.01-1.54]; p = 0.04 and RR = 1.06 [95% CI 1.01-1.12]; p = 0.03, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Palonosetron is effective in the prophylaxis of delayed CINV in pediatric patients.

Addition of aprepitant improves acute emesis control in children and adolescents receiving induction chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukaemia: a randomised, open-label trial

OBJECTIVES

More than 50% patients develop emesis during induction therapy for acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). The addition of aprepitant for emesis control in children receiving induction for AML have not been explored.

METHODS

A single-institutional randomised, open-label trial (NCT02979548) was conducted where children between 5 and 18 years with the diagnosis of AML being planned for 3+7 induction regimen were included. All study participants received ondansetron (0.15 mg/kg) every 8 hours for 8 days starting 30 min prior to chemotherapy. Children belonging to aprepitant group additionally received aprepitant capsules (15-40 kg=days 1-3, 80 mg; >40 kg=day 1, 125 mg and days 2-3, 80 mg) starting from 1 hour prior to chemotherapy. The proportion of patients with complete response (CR) in chemotherapy induced vomiting (CIV) in acute phase (day 1-8), delayed phase (day 9-13), overall and initial 96 hours were recorded along with severity of vomiting and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Total 78 children were randomised (Aprepitant group: 37 and control group: 41). The proportion of patients with CR in CIV was significantly higher in Aprepitant group in acute phase (p=0.007), overall phase (p=0.007) and in initial 96 hours (p<0.001) but it was not different in delayed phase (p=0.07). The first episode of vomiting was also significantly delayed in aprepitant group (p=0.02). Adverse effect profile was similar in two groups.

CONCLUSION

Aprepitant significantly improves emesis control in children receiving induction therapy for AML, especially in acute phase and should be routinely incorporated as part of antiemetic prophylaxis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02979548).

Risk factors associated with nausea and vomiting in children with cancer receiving chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Despite treatment with antiemetic medications, nausea remains uncontrolled for many children receiving chemotherapy. One reason is that risk factors for nausea in children remain poorly explored. The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea (CIN) in children.

METHODS

Prospective, observational study including 101 children (median age 6.4 years, range 0.8-17.9) with cancer receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were complete control of acute and delayed CIN, defined as no nausea in the acute phase 0-24 h after chemotherapy and in the delayed phase starting after the acute phase and ending 5 days later. Multivariable analyses included age, sex, cancer type, susceptibility to motion sickness, chemotherapy duration, numbers of antiemetics, co-administration with opioids or tricyclic antidepressants, and previously uncontrolled nausea or vomiting.

RESULTS

Acute CIN was associated with susceptibility to motion sickness (odds ratio [OR] 5.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36-33.7) and older age (OR 4.19, 95% CI 1.30-14.7), comparing age group 8-18 years with 0-3 years. Delayed CIN was associated with uncontrolled acute nausea or vomiting (OR 10.3, 95% CI 2.65-50.9), highly emetogenic chemotherapy (OR 8.26, 95% CI 1.17-76.8), and having a hematologic cancer type (OR 7.81, 95% CI 1.05-79.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Susceptibility to motion sickness and age can influence the risk of acute CIN. More research is needed on how best to integrate risk information in preventive antiemetic strategies. Sufficient acute nausea and vomiting control are crucial to prevent delayed CIN.

Effect of peppermint-lemon aromatherapy on nausea-vomiting and quality of life in pediatric patients with leukemia: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting, frequently induced by chemotherapy, can delay treatment protocols and the healing process.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to determine how aromatherapy inhalation with peppermint and lemon using a diffuser affects nausea-vomiting management and quality of life in 2-12-year-old children undergoing chemotherapy.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The study utilized a pretest-posttest control group experimental design with randomized groups. A total of 90 children who met the inclusion criteria were included in the study. The experimental group received Mentha Piperita and Citrus Lemon essential oils through a diffuser, while the placebo group received water through a diffuser. The control group did not receive any intervention.

RESULTS

Pulse and respiratory rates of children treated with aromatherapy were found to be significantly lower than the other groups. After aromatherapy application, quality of life of the children in the experimental group was significantly higher than the other groups. The change in the Index of Nausea, Vomiting, and Retching scores of the experimental group on the 4th chemotherapy cycle compared to the 1st chemotherapy cycle was significantly higher than the change in the other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Consequently, it was determined that inhalation aromatherapy with peppermint-lemon was effective in the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea-vomiting symptoms and quality of life compared to the placebo and control groups.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Inhalation aromatherapy with mint-lemon can be used as an alternative method to improve the quality of life in children with leukemia who suffer from chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Efficacy and Safety of Olanzapine in Children Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy: A Randomized, Double-blind Placebo-controlled Phase 3 Trial

BACKGROUND

In this trial, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of olanzapine in children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, patients aged 3 to 18 years were randomly assigned to either the olanzapine group or the placebo group. All patients received intravenous ondansetron and dexamethasone 30 minutes before highly emetogenic chemotherapy, followed by oral ondansetron for 48 hours. Participants in the olanzapine group received olanzapine once daily on days 1 and 2, while those in the control group received a placebo in the same dosage and schedule. The primary objective was: (a) to compare the complete control rates of vomiting in the delayed phase and (b) to compare the complete control rates of vomiting in acute and overall phases. The secondary objective was to evaluate the safety of olanzapine and the need for rescue medications.

RESULTS

A total of 128 patients were randomly assigned either to the olanzapine group (n=63) or the control group (n=65). Complete control of vomiting between olanzapine and placebo group was 73% versus 48% ( P =0.005) in the delayed phase, 60% versus 54% ( P =0.46) in the acute phase, and 48% versus 34% ( P =0.117) in the overall phase, respectively. Grades 1 and 2 sedation was greater in the olanzapine group (46% vs. 14%; P <0.001). A significantly higher proportion of patients in the placebo group required rescue medications for vomiting compared with in the olanzapine group ( P =0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

Olanzapine significantly improved complete control of vomiting in the delayed phase. A considerably lesser proportion of patients in the olanzapine group needed rescue medications.

Overestimation of the effect of (fos)aprepitant on intravenous dexamethasone pharmacokinetics requires adaptation of the guidelines for children with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Purpose

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are common side effects in pediatric oncology treatment. Besides 5-HT₃-antagonists, both dexamethasone and aprepitant are cornerstone drugs in controlling these side effects. Based on results of adult studies, the dexamethasone dose is reduced by 50% when combined with aprepitant, because of a drug-drug interaction, even though data on the interaction in children is lacking. The current study was developed to investigate the effect of aprepitant on dexamethasone clearance (CL) in children, in order to assess if dexamethasone dose reduction for concomitant use of aprepitant is appropriate in the current antiemetic regimen.

Methods

In total, 65 children (0.6–17.9 years), receiving intravenous or oral antiemetic therapy (dexamethasone ± aprepitant) as standard of care, were included. 305 dexamethasone plasma concentrations were determined using LC–MS/MS. An integrated dexamethasone and aprepitant pharmacokinetic model was developed using non-linear mixed effects modelling in order to investigate the effect of aprepitant administration on dexamethasone CL.

Results

In this population, dexamethasone CL in patients with concomitant administration of aprepitant was reduced by approximately 30% of the uninhibited CL (23.3 L/h (95% confidence interval 20.4–26.0)). This result is not consistent with the results of adult studies (50% reduction). This difference was not age dependent, but might be related to the route of administration of dexamethasone. Future studies are needed to assess the difference in oral/intravenous dexamethasone.

Conclusion

When dexamethasone is given intravenously as a component of triple therapy to prevent CINV in children, we advise to reduce the dexamethasone dose by 30% instead of 50%.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07423-6.

Medicinal herbs in treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A review

Cancer development entangles with mutation and selection for cells that progressively increase capacity for proliferation and metastasis at the cellular level. Surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy are the standard treatments to manage several types of cancer. Chemotherapy is toxic for both normal and cancer cells and can induce unfavorable conditions, such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), that reduce patients' quality of life. Emesis after chemotherapy is categorized into two classes acute and delayed. Since ancient times, herbal medicines have been used in various cultures to manage stomachache, vomiting, and nausea. In this manuscript, the antiemetic mechanisms of several herbal medicines and their preparations such as Zingiber officinale (5-HT, NK-1 receptor and muscarinic antagonist activity), Mentha spicata (5-HT antagonist activity), Scutellaria baicalensis (antioxidant activity), Persumac (useful in delayed phase through antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anti-contractile properties) and Rikkunshito (supportive in acute and delayed phase through 5-HT receptor antagonist activity) have been reviewed to show their potential effects on decreasing CINV and attract scientists attention to formulate more herbal medicine to alleviate CINV in cancer patients. However, it is crucial to say that additional high-quality investigations are required to firmly verify the clinical effectiveness and safety of each plant/compound.

A scoping review of nausea, vomiting and retching measurement methods in children with cancer

Evaluation of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in the pediatric population is subject to diverse approaches. This scoping review summarizes the methods used in clinical studies that assessed nausea, vomiting or retching in children with cancer. We conducted a literature search of studies indexed in EMBASE and Ovid MEDLINE after 2000. Studies were included if they involved patients ≤18 years of age diagnosed with cancer, and had nausea, vomiting or retching as a primary study outcome. We excluded studies that reported only parent- or clinician-proxy measures without including the child's self-reported NVR, and those without specifying the NVR data collection process. The literature search identified twenty-four studies evaluating pediatric nausea, vomiting or retching. In the assessment of NVR, structured surveys were the most commonly used instrument for NVR assessment (75%) and the use of patient diaries (50%). Nine studies (38%) relied solely on self-reports from children as the outcome measure, while fifteen studies (62%) solicited input from parents/ caregivers and healthcare providers in addition to children's self-reports. Almost all the studies reported the frequency (n = 24) and/or severity (n = 23) of NVR symptoms and the use of antiemetic therapy (n = 19). Fewer studies evaluated distress caused by the symptoms (n = 2) and the effects of symptoms on activities of daily living (n = 4). Incorporating NVR measurement tools as part of standard of care for pediatric patients undergoing chemotherapy is strongly advocated. Based on the age group, we recommend the use of such tools comprising Likert scale, pictorial scales and structured scripts to assess various dimensions of a child's NVR experience.

Pharmacogenetic and clinical predictors of ondansetron failure in a diverse pediatric oncology population

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a frequently seen burdensome adverse event of cancer therapy. The 5-HT3 receptor antagonist ondansetron has improved the rates of CINV but, unfortunately, up to 30% of patients do not obtain satisfactory control. This study examined whether genetic variations in a relevant drug-metabolizing enzyme (CYP2D6), transporter (ABCB1), or receptor (5-HT3) were associated with ondansetron failure.

METHODS

DNA was extracted from blood and used to genotype: ABCB1 (3435C > T (rs1045642) and G2677A/T (rs2032582)), 5-HT3RB (rs3758987 T > C and rs45460698 (delAAG/dupAAG)), and CYP2D6 variants. Ondansetron failure was determined by review of the medical records and by patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-nine patients were approached; 103 consented. Participants were less than 1 to 33 years (mean 6.85). A total of 39.8% was female, 58.3% was White (22.3% Black, 19.4% other), and 24.3% was Hispanic. A majority had leukemia or lymphoma, and 41 (39.8%) met the definition of ondansetron failure. Of variants tested, rs45460698 independently showed a significant difference in risk of ondansetron failure between a mutant (any deletion) and normal allele (p = 0.0281, OR 2.67). Age and BMI were both predictive of ondansetron failure (age > 12 (OR 1.12, p = 0.0012) and higher BMI (OR 1.13, p = 0.0119)). In multivariate analysis, age > 12 was highly predictive of ondansetron failure (OR 7.108, p = 0.0008). rs45460698 was predictive when combined with an increased nausea phenotype variant of rs1045642 (OR 3.45, p = 0.0426).

CONCLUSION

Select phenotypes of 5-HT3RB and ABCB1, age, and potentially BMI can help predict increased risk for CINV in a diverse pediatric oncology population.

Pain coping strategies in paediatric patients newly diagnosed with leukaemia compared with healthy peers

Objective

Children with leukaemia experience special difficulties adapting to stressful medical procedures and to the adverse effects of chemotherapy, though they can implement their coping strategies.

The aims of the study were to assess whether the coping‐with‐pain strategies could be influenced by a child's personal and illness factors and to render possible comparisons between children with leukaemia and healthy peers. Another aim was to compare parents' and children's reports on coping strategies.

Methods

A total of 125 patients (average age = 6.79 years; SD = 3.40) with acute leukaemia (lymphocytic leukaemia 90.4% and myeloid leukaemia 9.6%) and age‐matched healthy children with their parents were enrolled in the study. A socio‐demographic questionnaire and the Waldon–Varni Pediatric Pain Coping Inventory, parent and self‐report versions, were administered 1 month after diagnosis. Data regarding the therapy's side effects were recorded.

Results

The comparison between proxy‐reports of the two groups of parents found significant differences in terms of social support, self‐cognitive instructions and catastrophising strategies. Children aged 6–10 years relied more heavily on distraction than children of other ages, using more problem‐solving and self‐cognitive instructions. The results indicated moderate parent–child agreement.

Conclusion

Health professionals could help paediatric leukaemic patients in adopting more efficiently pain coping strategies applicable for different ages.

Risk factors for chemotherapy-induced vomiting after general anesthesia in children with retinoblastoma: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV) severely affects the daily function, nutritional status, treatment compliance, therapeutic efficacy, curability, and the quality of life of patients. The aim of this study was to find the risk factors for CIV after general anesthesia in patients with retinoblastoma (RB).

METHODS

A retrospective review of the hospital records of children with RB, who underwent chemotherapy between January 2017 and December 2019, was conducted at our hospital.

RESULTS

Data of a total of 803 children with RB were reviewed. The incidence of CIV in children with RB was 19.30%. Univariate analysis showed statistically significant differences in age, height, weight, chemotherapy regimen, anesthesia dose, duration of surgery and general anesthesia, platelet count, platelet distribution width, lymphocytes, and indirect bilirubin between patients with and without vomiting (P<0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the main predictors of CIV in children with RB included older age [odds ratio (OR), 1.32; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11-1.56; P<0.01], low platelet count (OR, 0.997; 95% CI: 0.995-0.999; P<0.05), and chemotherapy regimen (intravenous chemotherapy versus intra-arterial chemotherapy; OR, 0.47; 95% CI: 0.29-0.76; P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed age, chemotherapy regimen, and platelet count as risk factors of CIV after general anesthesia in children with RB. Younger age and higher platelet count were protective factors for CIV. Compared with intravenous chemotherapy, the incidence of CIV was lower than that of intra-arterial chemotherapy. Although these factors cannot be modified, they can predict whether a patient may experience vomiting, assisting medical staff to formulate measures and intervenes in advance.

KEYWORDS

Retinoblastoma (RB); chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV); general anesthesia; multivariate analysis; risk factors.

Dexamethasone dosing for prevention of acute chemotherapy-induced vomiting in pediatric patients: A systematic review

A systematic review was undertaken to describe dexamethasone doses studied for chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV) prophylaxis in pediatric patients and their effects on achieving complete acute CIV control. No dose-finding studies were identified. However, 16 studies assessing pediatric patients who received dexamethasone were included and classified according to the emetogenicity of chemotherapy administered. Eight different total daily dexamethasone doses were administered to patients on day 1 of highly emetogenic chemotherapy: three in conjunction with aprepitant/fosaprepitant plus a 5HT₃ antagonist and five in conjunction with a 5HT₃ antagonist. Five different total daily dexamethasone doses were administered in conjunction with a 5HT₃ antagonist to patients on day 1 of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Due to the heterogeneity of studies identified, meta-analysis was not possible. The optimal dexamethasone dose to control acute CIV and to minimize harms in pediatric patients remains uncertain. This is a key area for future research.

Olanzapine for Prevention of Vomiting in Children and Adolescents Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy: Investigator-Initiated, Randomized, Open-Label Trial

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a significant toxicity of chemotherapy. Olanzapine is recommended in adult patients for the prevention of CINV but has not been prospectively investigated in children.

METHODS

This investigator-initiated, randomized, open-label trial evaluated olanzapine in children (ages 5-18 years) scheduled to receive the first cycle of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). All participants received aprepitant, ondansetron, and dexamethasone during and 2 days after chemotherapy. Participants in the study group additionally received oral olanzapine 0.14 mg/kg/day (rounded to the nearest 2.5 mg; maximum, 10 mg) during the chemotherapy block and 3 days postchemotherapy. The primary objective was to compare complete response (CR) rates (no vomiting and no rescue medication) between the groups in the acute, delayed, and overall periods. Nausea comparison and safety evaluation were secondary and additional objectives, respectively. The collection of outcomes and adverse events was performed daily until the completion of the overall period.

RESULTS

A total of 240 patients underwent randomization. We performed a modified intention-to-treat analysis on 231 patients (116 in the control group and 115 in the study group). A higher proportion of patients in the olanzapine group achieved CR in the acute period (78% v 59%; P = .001), delayed period (74% v 47%; P < .001) and overall period (64% v 38%; P < .001) than in the control group. The proportion of patients with no nausea was significantly higher in the olanzapine group in the acute period (74% v 52%; P < .001), delayed period (74% v 47%; P < .001), and overall period (64% v 37%; P < .001). Grade 1/2 somnolence was greater in the olanzapine group (35% v 11%; P < .001). There was no grade 3/4 somnolence reported.

CONCLUSION

Olanzapine significantly improved CR rates for vomiting in children receiving the first cycle of HEC.

Guideline concordant care for prevention of acute chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children, adolescents, and young adults

PURPOSE

Prescribing guideline-recommended anti-emetics is an effective strategy to prevent CINV. However, the rate of guideline-concordant care is not well-understood. The purpose of this study was to describe the proportion of pediatric, adolescent, and young adult patients receiving HEC or MEC who received guideline-concordant antiemetic prophylaxis for acute CINV and to identify potential predictors of guideline-concordant antiemetic prophylaxis.

METHODS

Using electronic health record data from 2016 through 2018, a retrospective single-institution cohort study was conducted to investigate how often patients less than 26 years of age receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy receive guideline-concordant prophylaxis for acute CINV. Guideline-concordant care was defined according to guidelines from the Pediatric Oncology Group of Ontario for patients < 18 years and the American Society of Clinical Oncology for those ≥ 18 years. Independent variables included: sex, age, insurance status, race, ethnicity, cancer type, chemotherapy regimen, clinical setting, chemotherapy emetogenicity, and patient location. Predictors of receiving guideline-concordant care were determined using multiple logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 180 eligible patients, 65 (36.1%) received guideline-concordant care. In multivariable analysis, being treated in adult oncology setting (aOR 14.3, CI95 5.3-38.6), with a cisplatin-based regimen (aOR 3.5, CI951.4-9.0), solid tumor diagnosis (aOR 2.2, CI95 1.0-4.8), and commercial insurance (aOR 2.4, CI95 1.1-5.2) were associated with significantly higher likelihood of receiving guideline-concordant care.

CONCLUSIONS

Multi-level factors were associated with receiving guideline concordant care for prevention of CINV in children, adolescents, and young adults receiving emetogenic chemotherapy. These findings can inform current efforts to optimize implementation strategies for supportive care guidelines.

Modeling and Simulation Analysis of Aprepitant Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Patients With Postoperative or Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

OBJECTIVES

Aprepitant is effective for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced or postoperative nausea and vomiting (CINV/PONV). The aim of this study was to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model of aprepitant in pediatric patients and to support dosing recommendations for oral aprepitant in pediatric patients at risk of CINV.

METHODS

A population PK model was constructed based on data from 3 clinical studies in which children (6 months to 12 years) and adolescents (12–19 years) were treated with a 3-day regimen of oral aprepitant (capsules or suspension), with or without intravenous fosaprepitant on day 1 (CINV), or a single dose of oral aprepitant (capsules or suspension; PONV). Nonlinear mixed-effects modeling was used for model development, and a stepwise covariate search determined factors influencing PK parameters. Simulations were performed to guide final dosing strategies of aprepitant in pediatric patients.

RESULTS

The analysis included 1326 aprepitant plasma concentrations from 147 patients. Aprepitant PK was described by a 2-compartment model with linear elimination and first-order absorption, with allometric scaling for central and peripheral clearance and volume using body weight, and a cytochrome P450 3A4 maturation component for the effect of ontogeny on systemic clearance. Simulations established that application of a weight-based (for those &lt;12 years) and fixed-dose (for those 12–17 years) dosing regimen results in comparable exposures to those observed in adults.

CONCLUSIONS

The developed population PK model adequately described aprepitant PK across a broad pediatric population, justifying fixed (adult) dosing for adolescents and weight-based dosing of oral aprepitant for children.

Factors Associated With Chemotherapy-Induced Vomiting Control in Pediatric Patients Receiving Moderately or Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy: A Pooled Analysis

PURPOSE

To identify factors associated with chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV) control in pediatric patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An individual, patient-level, pooled analysis was performed using data from five clinical trials of aprepitant or fosaprepitant in pediatric patients receiving HEC or MEC. The proportion of individuals who experienced no vomiting (complete CIV control) during the phase of interest was the primary study end point. The association of acute-phase complete CIV control (from first chemotherapy dose to 24 hours after the last chemotherapy dose of the chemotherapy block) with age, sex, race, cancer type, acute-phase duration, and antiemetic regimen was examined. Association of the same factors and acute-phase complete CIV control with complete CIV control in the delayed phase (end of acute phase until ≤ 96 hours later) was examined.

RESULTS

A total of 735 patients (mean age, 8.9 years; range, 0.3 to 17.9 years) were included in the acute-phase analysis. Acute-phase complete CIV control was less likely in older patients (relative risk [RR], 0.97 per year; 95% CI, 0.96 to 0.98 per year) and longer acute-phase duration (RR, 0.89 per day; 95% CI, 0.84 to 0.94 per day). Receipt of ondansetron plus aprepitant or fosaprepitant was associated with a higher likelihood of acute-phase complete CIV control versus ondansetron alone (RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.50). Delayed-phase complete CIV control was more likely in patients with acute-phase complete CIV control (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.34) and in those who received aprepitant or fosaprepitant.

CONCLUSION

Younger age, shorter acute-phase duration, and antiemetic regimen were associated with acute-phase complete CIV control in pediatric patients receiving HEC or MEC. Acute-phase complete CIV control and antiemetic regimen were associated with delayed-phase complete CIV control.

[Prevention and treatment of antineoplastic drug-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric onco-hematology: An update]

Antineoplastic drug induced nausea and vomiting are common adverse events in cancer care of paediatric patients ; therefore, prevention and management of these adverse events is a major concern for healthcare professionals. There are common features between paediatric and adult patients in terms of the emetogenic level depending on antineoplastic agents or about available medicines. However, there are also specificities for paediatric population including individual risk factors of emesis or nausea assessment for example. Knowledge relative to available medicines is also limited in the paediatric population, especially for recent medicines. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview about antiemetics in paediatric oncology to clinicians and other healthcare professionals involved in paediatric cancer care. First of all, we describe physiopathological paediatric specificity, risk factors and clinical assessment of antineoplastic drug induced nausea and vomiting. Secondly, we focus on available medicines and also address the issue of complementary and alternative medicines.

Frequency, Severity, and Distress Associated With Physical and Psychosocial Symptoms at Home in Children and Adolescents With Cancer

Malignancy- and cancer-related treatments lead to multiple symptoms. Although treatments focus on cure, few research studies have examined the symptoms that accompany these aggressive and complicated treatments. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the symptoms experienced by children at home. Children (n = 25) and adolescents (n = 33) diagnosed with cancer completed the Memorial Symptoms Assessment Scale during the 5 days at home after discharge from the hospital. The most frequent physical symptoms were fatigue (52.1%), nausea (50.7%), lack of appetite (43.7%), and pain (42.3%). The most frequent psychological symptoms were difficulty sleeping (21.1%), worrying (18.3%), feeling sad (18.3%), and feeling nervous (16.9%). Significant differences were found in the overall physical and psychosocial symptoms and Global Distress Index in patients with and without pain, fatigue, and nausea. Results indicated that physical and psychosocial symptoms and Global Distress Index increased as severity of pain, nausea, and fatigue increased. Children and adolescents were experiencing many symptoms at home but were often not reporting them.

Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, safety, and tolerability of fosaprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Current antiemetic regimens are less effective in children than in adults. Fosaprepitant was recently approved for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in children aged six months and older.

PROCEDURE

The pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) profile, safety, and tolerability of a single intravenous dose of fosaprepitant administered concomitantly with ondansetron with/without dexamethasone were evaluated in pediatric patients with cancer receiving emetogenic chemotherapy. PK/PD from three doses of fosaprepitant (3.0, 1.2, and 0.4 mg/kg, up to 150, 60, and 20 mg, respectively) were compared with placebo in 2- to 17-year-old subjects; an open-label amendment evaluated a fourth dose (5.0 mg/kg, up to 150 mg) in those under 12 years old. Historical adult PK data were used for comparison. Efficacy was measured as an exploratory endpoint.

RESULTS

PK data were evaluable for 167/234 subjects who completed cycle one. Aprepitant exposures were dose proportional; adolescents (12 to 17 years) receiving fosaprepitant 150 mg had exposures similar to adults at the same dose. Higher weight-normalized doses (5 mg/kg) were necessary for children aged < 12 years to achieve comparable adult exposures. The adverse event profile was typical of cancer patients receiving emetogenic chemotherapy. Drug-related adverse events were reported in 16 (6.8%) subjects, with hiccups being most common (n = 5; 2.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous fosaprepitant was well tolerated by pediatric subjects with cancer, and dose-proportional exposures were observed. Subjects < 12 years old required higher doses to achieve comparable adult exposures.

Risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea in pediatric patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Little is known regarding risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea (CIN) in pediatric patients.

PROCEDURE

A secondary analysis was conducted of a previously published multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind, sham-controlled trial assessing the efficacy of acupressure in preventing CIN in pediatric patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. The primary outcome was nausea severity, self-reported using the Pediatric Nausea Assessment Tool. The relationships between acute and delayed nausea severity and patient- (sex, race, age, and cancer diagnosis) and treatment-related (chemotherapy, antiemetic prophylaxis, CIN, and vomiting control) factors were analyzed by a proportional odds generalized estimating equation approach. The acute phase started with administration of the first and continued for 24 hours after the last chemotherapy dose. The delayed phase started at the end of the acute phase and continued until the next chemotherapy block (maximum seven days).

RESULTS

In the acute and delayed phases, 165 and 144 patients provided data for analysis, respectively. Nonwhite race was significantly associated with higher acute phase nausea severity (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.6). Poor CIN control in the acute phase (OR, 16; 95% CI, 4.0-64.6), diagnosis of a cancer other than a central nervous system (CNS) tumor (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.2-5.3), and cisplatin administration (OR, 3.7; 95% CI, 2.1-6.0) were significantly associated with higher delayed phase nausea severity.

CONCLUSION

Acute phase CIN was associated with nonwhite race. Delayed phase CIN was associated with poor acute phase CIN control, diagnosis of non-CNS cancer, and receipt of cisplatin. These findings will inform future antiemetic trial design.

Intravenous fosaprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced vomiting in children: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Fosaprepitant is a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, approved for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The data on the use of fosaprepitant in children are limited and therefore we conducted a phase III randomized controlled trial.

PROCEDURE

Children aged 1-12 years scheduled to receive moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy were randomly assigned to arm-A (fosaprepitant) or arm-B (placebo). Children recruited to arm-A received intravenous ondansetron plus dexamethasone followed by fosaprepitant infusion. Children recruited to arm-B received the same drugs as those given to children in arm-A, except that fosaprepitant was substituted with a placebo. Ondansetron and dexamethasone were continued for 48 hours after completion of chemotherapy. The primary end point of the study was to determine the proportion of patients who achieved a complete response (CR), defined as no vomiting, no retching, and no use of rescue medication, during the 24-120 hours (delayed phase) after administration of the last dose of chemotherapy. Secondary end points were the proportion of patients who achieved a CR during the acute phase (0-24 hours) and overall after administration of the last dose of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

One-hundred-sixty-three patients were analyzed (81 in the fosaprepitant arm and 82 in the placebo arm). CR rates were significantly higher in the fosaprepitant arm compared to those in the placebo arm during the acute phase (86% vs 60%, P < 0.001), delayed phase (79% vs 51%, P < 0.001), and overall phase (70% vs 41%, P < 0.001). Three (4%) patients in the fosaprepitant arm and sixteen (20%) in the placebo arm required rescue anti-emetics (P = 0.0017).

CONCLUSION

Addition of fosaprepitant to ondansetron and dexamethasone improved chemotherapy-induced vomiting control in children treated with moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

Evaluation of aprepitant and fosaprepitant in pediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Single-dose i.v. fosaprepitant has been approved as an alternative to 3 day oral aprepitant, a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, and improves prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Because fosaprepitant has shown similar efficacy to aprepitant in adult patients only, this study compared the efficacy and safety of aprepitant and fosaprepitant in pediatric patients.

METHODS

Children younger than 18 years who received aprepitant or fosaprepitant to manage CINV between January 2015 and March 2018 at the National Cancer Center Hospital (Tokyo) were recruited to this study. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR; no vomiting/rescue medication) between 0 and 120 h after the start of chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints were safety based on the frequency of severe adverse events, and evaluation of patient characteristics as risk factors (effect of age and sex).

RESULTS

A total of 125 chemotherapy cycles were evaluated. In the aprepitant group, CR was observed in 36 of 80 treatment cycles (45.0%), whereas in the fosaprepitant group, it was observed in 19 of 45 cycles (42.2%; P = 0.852). No treatment-related severe adverse events were observed in either group. The number of non-CR was greater than that of CR in patients aged 6-14 years. The difference in CR rate between male and female patients was not statistically significant (47.1% vs 40.0%, respectively; P = 0.471).

CONCLUSIONS

Aprepitant and fosaprepitant were safely used and may be equally useful for pediatric patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. CR rate may be associated with patient age.

Acute chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children with cancer: Still waiting for a common consensus on treatment

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the most common treatment side-effects, and remains a significant concern, in children undergoing chemotherapy. Although adult patients receive chemotherapy regimens combined with appropriate standardized antiemetic treatment, children can receive markedly varying antiemetic treatments. A narrative review of CINV was performed regarding CINV definition, scoring system, prevention and treatment, specifically focussing on studies conducted with paediatric oncology patients. The review highlighted a lack of rigorously developed CINV scoring systems and standardized CINV pharmacological treatment for paediatric oncology patients. Different scoring systems were found to identify potential risk factors for CINV associated with the use of several different antiemetic drugs, however, few studies have been performed in children undergoing chemotherapy. Thus, CINV remains a distressing and partially controlled side-effect in the paediatric patient population. To reduce emesis and improve quality of life in paediatric oncology patients, standardized antiemetic treatment may be preferred, using a unique CINV scoring system that accounts for the emetogenic level of the chemotherapy regimen adopted and the children's clinical characteristics.

Evaluation of aprepitant for acute chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children and adolescents with acute lymphoblastic leukemia receiving high-dose methotrexate

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) negatively impacts patients' quality of life. The emetogenicity of high-dose methotrexate in children and adolescents with cancer is incompletely characterized. At our institution, a number of patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have received aprepitant with courses of high-dose methotrexate after poor CINV control with prior courses.

PROCEDURE

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis on patients with ALL who received methotrexate 5 g/m² /dose with and without concomitant aprepitant at Texas. Children's Hospital between October 1, 2010 and January 31, 2016.

RESULTS

We identified 16 patients who received a total of 69 courses of methotrexate. An enhanced antiemetic regimen containing aprepitant was administered with 42 methotrexate courses and resulted in a 54% reduction in the use of as-needed antiemetics (P = 0.002, 95% CI: 21-89%). There were no statistically significant differences in methotrexate area under the curve values (2,209 μM⋅hr/l ± 151 vs. 2,051 μM⋅hr/l ± 94, P = 0.355) or end-infusion methotrexate concentrations (80.5 μM ± 5.6 vs. 74.7 μM ± 3.2, P = 0.335) in patients receiving a standard versus an enhanced antiemetic regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of aprepitant reduces both CINV and the use of rescue antiemetics. Aprepitant does not appear to affect the pharmacokinetics of methotrexate. Granisetron was prescribed more frequently than ondansetron, but selection of secondary and tertiary agents, if any, was highly variable.

Nausea and vomiting in children and adolescents receiving intrathecal methotrexate: A prospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of nausea and vomiting after receipt of intrathecal methotrexate (IT-MTX) in pediatric oncology patients is unknown.

METHODS

Patients (4-18 years) about to receive IT-MTX were eligible to participate in this prospective, observational study. Patients received antiemetics as prescribed by their clinical team. Nausea severity (patient-assessed), timing of emetic episodes, and administration of antiemetics were recorded beginning immediately prior to IT-MTX administration, for the next 24 hr (acute phase), and for a maximum of 7 additional days (delayed phase). Complete chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) control was defined as no emetic episodes and no nausea.

RESULTS

One hundred patients consented to participate in this study; 70 provided evaluable data (mean age: 8.3 years; range: 4.1-17.6). Most (94%) received propofol-containing anesthesia for IT-MTX administration. Most (89%) received a 5-HT3 antagonist prior to IT-MTX. During the acute phase, 36 children (51%) experienced complete CINV control, 67 (96%) complete vomiting control, and 36 (51%) complete nausea control. Severe acute phase nausea was reported by 12 children (17%). During the delayed phase, 35 patients (50%) experienced complete CINV control, 60 (86%) complete vomiting control, and 36 (51%) complete nausea control. Severe nausea was reported in the delayed phase by 27 (39%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Most pediatric patients who received IT-MTX and prophylaxis with ondansetron or granisetron experienced complete acute and delayed vomiting control. However, nausea control was poor and severe nausea was reported by many children. Effective interventions to control nausea are needed.

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced vomiting in children receiving multiple-day cisplatin chemotherapy: A hospital-based, retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Optimal prevention of chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV) has not been established for patients receiving cisplatin in divided doses. The aim of this study was to describe the incidence and risk factors of CIV in children who received multiple-day cisplatin chemotherapy.

PROCEDURE

A total of 24 consecutive pediatric patients (age 0-19 years) who received multiple-day cisplatin chemotherapy in our hospital were enrolled. Patients with relapsed disease or primary intracranial tumor and those who received concurrent radiation therapy were excluded. The number of chemotherapy cycles reviewed was 107, with a median of five per patient. All patients received granisetron. Dexamethasone and NK-1 receptor antagonists (NK1RA) were used as additional antiemetics for prophylaxis of CIV.

RESULTS

CIV was observed in 22 of 24 (92%) patients, and 61 of 107 (57%) cycles. Patients who developed CIV had a higher incidence of other chemotherapy-related adverse events (87 vs. 41%, P < 0.001). The incidence of CIV was lower in patients administered with NK1RA than those without (32 vs. 68%, P < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression identified age less than or equal to 2 years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.10-0.63) and administration of NK1RA (OR = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.06-0.43) as independent factors for CIV.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that NK1RA is crucial to reduce CIV in children who receive multiple-day cisplatin chemotherapy.

Medical interventions for cancer treatment-induced symptoms in children: an overview

BACKGROUND

Childhood cancer accounts for 0.5 to 4.6% of the total number of cases in any population. According to the treatment, some side effects are present. Most adverse reactions can cause severe consequences for the survival of the patient. The more effective interventions for the management and the prevention of treatment-induced symptoms (TIS) in children with cancer are necessary to know. The objective of this review was to identify and describe available scientific evidence on the efficacy and safety of interventions used for the management and prevention of TIS in children with cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature on studies that evaluated or described the effectiveness of interventions used for the management and prevention of TIS in children with cancer in some of the major electronic databases. Results were qualitative synthesized and presented as evidence tables.

RESULTS

We identified eight systematic reviews. The revisions included experimental studies. All participants, including children and adults, were patients diagnosed with some cancer about to receive or that received treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed only a reduced number of clinical trials that have evaluated the interventions for the management of TIS in children with cancer. In addition, the available evidence was limited and of poor quality. It is necessary to conduct more clinical trials with good methodological quality and high statistical power.

Delayed Vomiting in Children With Cancer After Receiving Moderately High or Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy

Delayed vomiting is a potentially significant adverse effect of chemotherapy used to treat childhood cancer, but little is known about the experience of delayed vomiting in children and adolescents. An exploratory study was conducted to determine the pattern of delayed vomiting in children and adolescents with cancer after highly emetic chemotherapy and to identify possible risk factors. In a sample of 82 children and adolescents who completed 117 cycles of highly emetic chemotherapy, the overall prevalence of delayed vomiting was 32%. The frequency of delayed vomiting was highest on delayed day 2, with 21% of participants experiencing vomiting. By delayed day 7, only 9% of participants still reported vomiting. The severity of vomiting was moderate to severe in 11% to 12% of subjects. Age and gender had no significant effect on delayed vomiting. The emetic potential of the agent, incomplete protection from acute vomiting, and treatment regimens that lasted 6 or more days significantly affected delayed vomiting. In addition, a history of motion sickness, lack of acute control, and 6 or more days of chemotherapy were predictive of delayed vomiting.

Antiemetic medication for prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in childhood

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting remain a problem for children undergoing treatment for malignancies despite new antiemetic therapies. Optimising antiemetic regimens could improve quality of life by reducing nausea, vomiting, and associated clinical problems. This is an update of the original systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and adverse events of pharmacological interventions in controlling anticipatory, acute, and delayed nausea and vomiting in children and young people (aged less than 18 years) about to receive or receiving chemotherapy.

SEARCH METHODS

Searches included the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, PsycINFO, conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, International Society of Paediatric Oncology, Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, and ISI Science and Technology Proceedings Index from incept to December 16, 2014, and trial registries from their earliest records to December 2014. We examined references of systematic reviews and contacted trialists for information on further studies. We also screened the reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently screened abstracts in order to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a pharmacological antiemetic, cannabinoid, or benzodiazepine with placebo or any alternative active intervention in children and young people (less than 18 years) with a diagnosis of cancer who were to receive chemotherapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted outcome and quality data from each RCT. When appropriate, we undertook meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 34 studies that examined a range of different antiemetics, used different doses and comparators, and reported a variety of outcomes. The quality and quantity of included studies limited the exploration of heterogeneity to narrative approaches only.The majority of quantitative data related to the complete control of acute vomiting (27 studies). Adverse events were reported in 29 studies and nausea outcomes in 16 studies.Two studies assessed the addition of dexamethasone to 5-HT3 antagonists for complete control of vomiting (pooled risk ratio (RR) 2.03; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35 to 3.04). Three studies compared granisetron 20 mcg/kg with 40 mcg/kg for complete control of vomiting (pooled RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.07). Three studies compared granisetron with ondansetron for complete control of acute nausea (pooled RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.17; 2 studies), acute vomiting (pooled RR 2.26; 95% CI 2.04 to 2.51; 3 studies), delayed nausea (pooled RR 1.13; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.38; 2 studies), and delayed vomiting (pooled RR 1.13; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.29; 2 studies). No other pooled analyses were possible.Narrative synthesis suggests that 5-HT3 antagonists are more effective than older antiemetic agents, even when these agents are combined with a steroid. Cannabinoids are probably effective but produce frequent side effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our overall knowledge of the most effective antiemetics to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in childhood is incomplete. Future research should be undertaken in consultation with children, young people, and families that have experienced chemotherapy and should make use of validated, age-appropriate measures. This review suggests that 5-HT3 antagonists are effective in patients who are to receive emetogenic chemotherapy, with granisetron or palonosetron possibly better than ondansetron. Adding dexamethasone improves control of vomiting, although the risk-benefit profile of adjunctive steroid remains uncertain.

Poor chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting control in children receiving intermediate or high dose methotrexate

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy emetogenicity is the most important known determinant of chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV) in children. However, direct evidence regarding the emetogenic potential of chemotherapeutic agents in children is limited. This study describes the prevalence of complete control of acute and delayed phase chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in children receiving methotrexate. The prevalence of anticipatory CINV is described, and risk factors for CINV are explored.

METHODS

English-speaking children (4 to 18 years) receiving intermediate-dose (ID-MTX: >1 to <12 g/m(2)/dose) or high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX: ≥12 g/m(2)/dose) participated in this prospective study. Emetic episodes, nausea severity, and antiemetic administration were documented for 24 h from the start of the methotrexate infusion (acute phase) and for up to a further 168 h (delayed phase). CINV prophylaxis was provided at the discretion of the treating physician. Anticipatory CINV was assessed in the 24 h preceding chemotherapy. Complete CINV control was defined as no emetic episodes and no nausea.

RESULTS

Thirty children (mean age, 11.8 ± 4 years; ID-MTX, 20; HD-MTX, 10) completed the study. CINV prophylaxis included the following: ondansetron/granisetron plus dexamethasone or nabilone. Few patients experienced complete CINV control (ID-MTX: acute phase 20%, delayed phase 5%; HD-MTX: acute phase 0%, delayed phase 30%). Complete emesis control was higher (ID-MTX: acute phase 70%, delayed phase 50%; HD-MTX: acute phase 70%, delayed phase 60%). Anticipatory CINV was reported by 6/28 patients (21%). Patient age, sex, and history of motion sickness were not significant predictors of CINV.

CONCLUSIONS

The poor complete CINV control rate in children receiving methotrexate confirms the classification of HD-MTX as highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and suggests that ID-MTX be reclassified as HEC.

The weaned pig as a model for Doxorubicin-induced mucositis

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced mucositis (CIM) complicates cancer therapy and limits maximum tolerated doses and efficacy. Rodent models do not reproducibly mimic clinical CIM, so alternative models are needed.

METHODS

CIM severity was assessed after weaned pigs were treated with doxorubicin (5 and 3.75 mg/kg) using clinical observations, laboratory parameters and gastrointestinal structure and functions. Bovine colostrum was provided as an experimental intervention to the pigs treated receiving the 3.75 mg/kg dose.

RESULTS

Doxorubin at 3.75 mg/kg decreased food intake and weight gain (p < 0.05) and caused diarrhea and vomiting that coincided with damage to the small intestine mucosa based on histological scoring (p < 0.05). It resulted in higher serum TNF-α concentrations, increased chloride secretion and reduced brush border membrane disaccharidase activities and carrier-mediated glucose uptake (all p < 0.05). The gastrointestinal damage and dysfunction resemble the clinical and laboratory features of CIM in humans; these can be partially prevented by providing cow colostrum.

CONCLUSION

The weaned pig is a relevant large animal for studying CIM and evaluating existing and experimental interventions for mucositis.

Predictors of antiemetic alteration in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia

BACKGROUND

Better knowledge of patient and cancer treatment factors associated with nausea/vomiting (NV) in pediatric oncology patients could enhance prophylaxis. We aimed to describe such factors in children receiving treatment for acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

METHODS

Retrospective longitudinal cohort study of 1,668 hospitalized children undergoing treatment for AML from the Pediatric Health Information System database (39 hospitals, 1999-2010). Antiemetic alteration, which included switch (a change in prescribed 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists) and rescue (receipt of an adjunct antiemetic), were first validated and then used as surrogates of problematic NV. Logistic and negative binomial regression modeling were used to test whether patient characteristics were associated with problematic NV.

RESULTS

Increasing age is associated with greater odds of experiencing antiemetic switch and higher relative rate of antiemetic rescue. Within a treatment cycle, each consecutive inpatient chemotherapy day decreased the likelihood of requiring antiemetic alteration. Each consecutive inpatient-day post-chemotherapy was associated with decreased need for switch, but increased need for rescue. Subsequent cycles of AML therapy were associated with lower odds of antiemetic switch on both chemotherapy and non-chemotherapy days, a lower rate of antiemetic rescue on chemotherapy days, and an increased rate of rescue on non-chemotherapy days.

CONCLUSION

In pediatric patients with AML, increasing age is strongly associated with greater antiemetic alteration. Antiemetic alteration occurs early in treatment overall, and early within each admission. While additional cycles of therapy are associated with less alteration overall, there is persistent rescue in the days after chemotherapy, suggesting additional etiologies of NV in pediatric cancer patients.

Nursing care for adolescents and young adults with cancer: literature review

Cancer patients belonging to the adolescent and young adult (AYA) age group have unique and very specific needs, which require special attention from the caring staff. The difficulty in maintaining the personal and professional development at this age is both natural and normal. Adding to this, coping with a life-threatening disease turns this stage in life into a period with many dilemmas and challenges of quite a complex nature. AYA patients have to deal with issues above and beyond the disease itself, which create a very complex coping picture. On top of that, prognosis for this age group has not improved in recent years, unlike the situation in other age groups like children and adults. The literature on this subject is extensive and comprehensive. However, most of the papers on this subject are very specific and narrow in their approach, each dealing with a specific topic. In this article, we bring together many different papers which make a wide and comprehensive picture of the subject of AYAs coping with cancer, coupled with recommendations for the caring staff. In this review we focus on the various aspects of the disease and treatments in AYAs, based on the conceptual model of quality of life proposed by Ferrell and colleagues [Cancer Nurs 1992;15:153-160; Cancer Nurs 1992;15:247-253], including physical, social, emotional and spiritual aspects. From the psychological standpoint, most of the papers discuss the negative aspects; however, in this article we try to include some articles from the positive psychology school of thought. From our findings it is apparent that there is an opportunity and need to further explore research in this regard. It is apparent that taking a unique approach to AYA cancer patients is needed in order to deal with the unique needs of this age group. This article aims at putting a framework around this issue, with actionable recommendations for the caring staff.

Aprepitant reduces chemotherapy-induced vomiting in children and young adults with brain tumors

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting are common and distressing side effects in patients with brain tumors and may be associated with radiation and the administration of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). Pediatric antiemetic guidelines recommend administration of a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5HT3) receptor antagonists and the addition of aprepitant, a neurokinin 1 (NK1) antagonist with corticosteroids for the treatment of HEC. However, challenges persist in treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with brain tumors as corticosteroids are contraindicated due to potential impairment of the blood-brain barrier permeability. The objective was to determine whether a 5HT3 receptor antagonist and the addition of aprepitant, an NK1 antagonist without a corticosteroid, were effective in reducing HEC vomiting in pediatric brain tumor patients.

METHOD

A retrospective review found that 18 patients with a history of high-grade vomiting during radiation were prescribed a 5HT3 receptor antagonist and aprepitant without a corticosteroid during their first course of HEC. To determine the efficacy of aprepitant without a corticosteroid, each recipient was matched with 2 controls who did not receiv aprepitant.

RESULTS

During HEC, controls without aprepitant were more likely to have Grade 2 or higher vomiting than the aprepitant recipients (P = .03; odds ratio = 4.15; 95% confidence interval = 1.59-10.82), after controlling for radiation-associated vomiting toxicity.

DISCUSSION

Significantly less vomiting was identified in children receiving HEC and prescribed a 5HT3 receptor antagonist and aprepitant. Findings suggest that the addition of an NK1 antagonist may be beneficial to emetic control in this highly vulnerable population.

Safety and efficacy of aprepitant for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric patients: a prospective, observational study

Pediatric patients between the ages of 12 months and 17 years with a confirmed malignancy who were scheduled to receive aprepitant as part of triple therapy antiemetic prophylaxis for a cycle of moderately- or highly emetogenic chemotherapy were eligible for enrollment. Patients were evaluated for the incidence of nausea, episodes of emesis, interference with activities of daily living (ADLs), and appetite through utilization of a patient survey. Eleven patients were enrolled for a total of 20 patient encounters, mean age 9.55 ± 4.85 (range, 12 months-17 years). Aprepitant was well-tolerated and complete response (CR) rate was 38.9%.

Aprepitant and fosaprepitant use in children and adolescents at an academic medical center

OBJECTIVE

To describe the use of aprepitant and fosaprepitant, a neurokinin 1 (NK-1) receptor inhibitor, in children and adolescents at a large academic medical center, for the prevention and management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV).

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted using an electronic medical record system to evaluate the use of aprepitant and fosaprepitant in all pediatric patients that were discharged from a single academic medical center between February 25, 2009 and May 25, 2012.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients were included in this review and received a total of 287 doses over the span of 114 cycles. Mean age was 10.1 years, with a range of 11 months to 17 years old. In 16 of 26 patients, aprepitant was used as the primary prophylaxis. Of those patients who received primary prophylaxis, 6 of 16 received it for highly emetogenic chemotherapy, and 10 of 16 received it for moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Intravenous fosaprepitant was used in 7 of 26 patients, ages 13 to 17 (median 14) years old. No adverse effects attributable to aprepitant were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of aprepitant and fosaprepitant in pediatric patients appeared to be well tolerated. No currently published reports data using aprepitant in a patient younger than 32 months old, whereas we reported its use in patients as young as 11 months old.